Cambridge restaurant CB2 accuses city council of thwarting expansion as landlords

22/04/14 CB2 cafe wants to expand but Cambridge City Council is refusing to lease them an empty building next door. Pictured ltr are Manager Petra Fabian with Solicitor Rupert Gould. Picture: Keith Heppell

A popular Cambridge restaurant has accused the city council of hampering its expansion hopes by refusing to let the adjoining property.

CB2 has traded from council-owned premises in Norfolk Street, Petersfield, since 1998, and now wants to take on the adjoining property, which is also owned by the authority and is currently leased by the Changing Spaces art organisation.

Directors of the bar and venue complain their current kitchen is too small and that they need more space to improve the ambience for customers.

But attempts to secure a deal with the council have so far come to nought.

Rupert Gould, a director of CB2, said he feared the adjacent property could go the way of the former Cyber Café in Norfolk Street and be converted into flats if the council did not budge.

He said the council wanted to increase the rent for the existing property and that the arrival of Tesco in East Road was a worrying sign for trade in the neighbourhood.

Mr Gould said: “We have heard nothing other than a refusal to discuss any arrangement despite offers to pay them market rent and compensate them should residential values prevail.

“This is not a great money-making machine able to pay higher rents and higher rates with no room to expand.

“The city council has to wake up if we don’t want all the commercial entities in Cambridge to be national chains serving fast food that is sourced and cooked elsewhere.”

A petition has been launched in the restaurant, which has no plans for residential development, asking for customers’ support.

Ray Ward, the city council’s director of business transformation, said he had reviewed the case recently.

He said: “CB2 have been in discussion with us about their interest in the adjoining property at 9 Norfolk Street, which is also owned by the council, for around a year.

“However, it has not been possible to agree acceptable terms with them for the occupation of that property.”